Invisible strings. The first single crystal of the cTSAP form of [Eu(DOTA)(H2O)]- has an electronic structure similar to one of the reported cSAP forms.

The coordination geometry of lanthanide(III) ions is extremely sensitive to perturbation from the surrounding environment. Changes in the crystal field can be observed as spectral variations in the emission spectra of luminescent lanthanide(III) ions. Europium(III) ions are commonly used to correlate luminescence properties to the crystal field. In solution, kinetically inert complexes as [Ln(DOTA)(H2O)]- can fluctuate and give rise to different diastereomers (H4DOTA = 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid). The [Ln(DOTA)(H2O)]- complex adopts a capped square antiprism (cSAP) geometry but can rotate into a capped twisted square antiprism (cTSAP). The time scale of the solution dynamics in [Ln(DOTA)(H2O)]- is shorter than that of luminescence emission, thus, structural averages are observed in the emission spectra. For the first time, we were able to crystallise both forms of the [Eu(DOTA)(H2O)]- diastereomers. The single crystal structure was combined with single crystal luminescence spectroscopy to reveal the electronic structure of Eu(III) in each form of the complex. The coordination geometry of the crystallized cSAP and cTSAP forms of the complex was compared to ideal coordination polyhedra using a continuous symmetry measure in the AlignIt code. The diastereomers of [Eu(DOTA)(H2O)]- all demonstrate very little deviation from ideal geometries yet nearly identical electronic properties were observed from the two different forms.

Long story short: donor set symmetry in [Eu(DOTA)(H2O)]- crystals determines the electronic structure.

Lanthanide complexes of 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid DOTA have been studied in great detail due to their use as MRI contrast agents. Since the first report from Desreux in 1980, the Ln[DOTA]- complexes of gadolinium(III) in particular have been thoroughly investigated. The forms of the nine-coordinated [Ln(DOTA)(H2O)]- complexes are well known, and the ligand backbone has been used extensively to create functional MRI contrast agents, luminescent probes, and as a model system for studying the properties of lanthanide(III) ions. In solution, the photophysical properties have been mapped, but as the structures are not known, direct structure-property relationships have not been created. Here, the electronic properties of two Eu[DOTA] compounds (1 and 2) and a Eu[DOTA]-like compound (3) were studied using single-crystal luminescence spectroscopy. The donor set in the three compounds is identical (4N 4O 1O), and using the symmetry deviation value σideal it was shown that the coordination geometry is close to identical. Nevertheless, the electronic properties evaluated using the luminescence spectrum were found to differ significantly between the three compounds. The magnitude of the crystal field splitting was found not to scale with the symmetry of the coordination geometry. It was concluded that the donor set dictates the splitting, yet the structure-property relationships governing the electronic properties of europium(III) ions still elude us.

Delicate, a study of the structural changes in ten-coordinated La(III), Ce(III), Pr(III), Nd(III), Sm(III) and Eu(III) sulfates.

We recently presented a new method that allows for a direct structural comparison of coordination complexes. The main difference from other methods is that our AlignIt approach uses common scaling and orientation of the complexes when computing the symmetry deviation, σideal, values. Here, six apparently isostructural lanthanide(III) sulfates K6[(Ln)2(SO4)6]/K5Na[(Ln)2(SO4)6] with ten-coordinated lanthanide(III) sites (Ln(O)10) were prepared, and single-crystal structures were determined and compared using the symmetry deviation (σideal) values. The six structures were shown to fall into two groups: Pr(III) and Eu(III) are identical (σideal = 0.04) bar in size. With a maximum σideal of 0.07, the same was found to be true for La(III), Ce(III), Nd(III), Sm(III) structures. The two groups are shown to be significantly different (σideal > 2.7), yet the coordination geometries of all six are best described as bicapped square antiprisms (σideal = 1.15-1.68). The structures differ in more than symmetry as the smaller lanthanides are shown to crystallize with one sodium and five potassium ions, while the larger lanthanides crystallize with six potassium ions. This does not change the structure and we postulate that the structural variation is due to delicate size matching between alkali and lanthanide ions. For the first six lanthanides, this structure is very robust, which is confirmed as seven doped systems readily crystallized. These doped systems were prepared in order to use europium(III) luminescence as a structural probe. Unsurprisingly, only the doped Eu-La and Eu-Ce systems were found to be luminescent. Between these two and all the europium(III) systems, the intricate structural differences were shown to be enough to change both crystal field splitting and luminescence lifetime. We conclude that even in simple dilution experiments, where luminescent lanthanide(III) ions are introduced in 'innocent' hosts materials, the structure can act as a modulator for the observed properties.

We are never ever getting (back to) ideal symmetry: structure and luminescence in a ten-coordinated europium(III) sulfate crystal.

Our theoretical treatment of electronic structures in coordination complexes often rests on assumptions of symmetry. Experiments rarely provide fully symmetric systems to study. In solutions, fluctuations in solvation, variations in conformations, and even changes in constitution occur and complicate the picture. In crystals, lattice distortion, energy transfer, and phonon quenching play a role, but we are able to identify distinct symmetries. Yet the question remains: How is the real symmetry in a crystal compared to ideal symmetries?

Revisiting the assignment of innocent and non-innocent counterions in lanthanide(III) solution chemistry.

Lanthanides are found in critical applications from display technology to renewable energy. Often, these rare earth elements are used as alloys or functional materials, yet access to them is through solution processes. In aqueous solutions, the rare earths are found predominantly as trivalent ions and charge balance dictates that counterions are present. The fast ligand exchange and lack of directional bonding in lanthanide complexes have led to questions regarding the speciation of Ln3+ solvates in the presence of various counterions and the distinction between innocent = non-coordinating and non-innocent = coordinating counterions. There is limited agreement as to which group counterions belong to, which led to this report. By using Eu3+ luminescence, it was possible to clearly distinguish between coordinating and non-coordinating ions. To interpret the results, it was required to bridge the descriptions of ion pairing and coordination. The data-in the form of Eu3+ luminescence spectra and luminescence lifetimes from solutions with varying concentrations of acetate, chloride, nitrate, sulfate, perchlorate and triflate-was contrasted to those obtained with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA4-), which allowed for the distinction between three Ln3+-anion interaction types. It was possible to conclude which counterions are truly innocent (e.g. ClO4- and OTf-) and which clearly coordinate (e.g. NO3- and AcO-). Finally, a considerable amount of data from systems studied under similar conditions allowed the minimum perturbation arising from the inner sphere or outer sphere coordination in Eu3+ complexes to be identified.